Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26239519›Full record

ArticleBMC evolutionary biology2015

Analysis of phylogenomic datasets reveals conflict, concordance, and gene duplications with examples from animals and plants.

Stephen A Smith, Michael J Moore, Joseph W Brown, Ya Yang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC evolutionary biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 205 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
205citing papers in PubMed
9.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

205 citing papers in PubMed, 649 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Phylogenomic conflict inPlant diversity · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Resolving the Taxonomic Enigma ofEcology and evolution · 2026
    Article

145 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Stephen A SmithDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan, S State St, Ann Arbor, 48109, MI, USA. eebsmith@umich.edu.
Michael J MooreDepartment of Biology, Oberlin College, W Lorain St, Oberlin, 44074, OH, USA. michael.moore@oberlin.edu.
Joseph W BrownDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan, S State St, Ann Arbor, 48109, MI, USA. josephwb@umich.edu.
Ya YangDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Michigan, S State St, Ann Arbor, 48109, MI, USA. yangya@umich.edu.
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor · USOberlin College · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of transcriptomic and genomic datasets for phylogenetic reconstruction has become increasingly common as researchers attempt to resolve recalcitrant nodes with increasing amounts of data. The large size and complexity of these datasets introduce significant phylogenetic noise and conflict into subsequent analyses. The sources of conflict may include hybridization, incomplete lineage sorting, or horizontal gene transfer, and may vary across the phylogeny. For phylogenetic analysis, this noise and conflict has been accommodated in one of several ways: by binning gene regions into subsets to isolate consistent phylogenetic signal; by using gene-tree methods for reconstruction, where conflict is presumed to be explained by incomplete lineage sorting (ILS); or through concatenation, where noise is presumed to be the dominant source of conflict. The results provided herein emphasize that analysis of individual homologous gene regions can greatly improve our understanding of the underlying conflict within these datasets.

resultsHere we examined two published transcriptomic datasets, the angiosperm group Caryophyllales and the aculeate Hymenoptera, for the presence of conflict, concordance, and gene duplications in individual homologs across the phylogeny. We found significant conflict throughout the phylogeny in both datasets and in particular along the backbone. While some nodes in each phylogeny showed patterns of conflict similar to what might be expected with ILS alone, the backbone nodes also exhibited low levels of phylogenetic signal. In addition, certain nodes, especially in the Caryophyllales, had highly elevated levels of strongly supported conflict that cannot be explained by ILS alone.

conclusionThis study demonstrates that phylogenetic signal is highly variable in phylogenomic data sampled across related species and poses challenges when conducting species tree analyses on large genomic and transcriptomic datasets. Further insight into the conflict and processes underlying these complex datasets is necessary to improve and develop adequate models for sequence analysis and downstream applications. To aid this effort, we developed the open source software phyparts ( https://bitbucket.org/blackrim/phyparts ), which calculates unique, conflicting, and concordant bipartitions, maps gene duplications, and outputs summary statistics such as internode certainy (ICA) scores and node-specific counts of gene duplications.

Indexed as

Gene DuplicationGene Transfer, HorizontalAnimalsGenomicsMagnoliopsidaPhylogenySoftwareWasps

Identifiers

PMID26239519
PMCPMC4524127
OpenAlexW1886547141

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.